02/11/2002 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

• • COUNCIL MINUTES JANUARY 14, 2002 ordinances. He reiterated if the plats meet those ordinance requirements, then the City would be in the position of approving those developments. He did not feel the plats should be allowed to move forward if it was likely they would not be approved. Councilmember Carlson questioned whether it would be possible to allow the three applications currently before the City to move forward providing they meet the new ordinances. Community Development Director Grochala noted the City does not at this point know what the new ordinance requirements will be. He believed the developers were asking to proceed with the current ordinance requirements and staff would not at this time be able to review the plats based on the new Comprehensive Plan. He felt there could be a verbal agreement from the developers to comply with the new ordinance regulations but he was not certain the City could ask for this type of agreement when the new regulations are unknown. Mayor Bergeson believed the Vaughn development would not apply to these concerns since it has already been reviewed by the Planning and Zoning Board and will be before the Council prior to the effective date of the moratorium. However, he noted one issue the Planning and Zoning Board had with the Vaughn development was the number of lots: roposed. He questioned, if changes were made to the development, how the City would determine at what point in the process a new application would have to be made and how to apply c #her the new''ordinance requirements or the old requirements. Community Development Director Grochala believedthe City has an opportunity to act on the Vaughn development prior to the effective date of the moratorium. However, if the development were to fail at that time and a new applicationwas submitted, it would be subject to the moratorium. City Attorney Hawkins stated if the Council denied the Vaughn development and Mr. Vaughn then submitted a new plat that was substantially different than the original, he would have to file a new application. He believed if the development Was denied due to a slight dislike of the configuration it r„ may be possible to reconsider the development under the existing application if the changes were not substantial. Councilmember Carlson asked how the moratorium would affect the Vaughn application if the application were tabled by the Council. City Attorney Hawkins stated if the proposed action this evening was to allow plats that have been filed to move forward until they are denied, then the Vaughn development would still be an open application even if tabled. Councilmember Reinert requested clarification if the plats received to date were allowed to move forward could they be considered beyond the effective date of the moratorium. City Attorney Hawkins clarified that any preliminary plats falling under this exemption could then go forward in the process until they were either approved or denied. Councilmember Carlson expressed concern whether the Council could hold the recently received plats to the new ordinances if they were exempted from the moratorium. City Attorney Hawkins stated those plats would have the right to be judged under the existing ordinances. 16